' This petition under Article 199 of the Constitution of Islamic Republic of Pakistan, 1973 calls in question the legality of the charge-sheet dated 22-7-1997 whereby the petitioner was called upon to show cause against his conduct as Inquiry Officer to enquire into the conduct of one Mrs. Fauzia Khurshid, Assistant Director (Psy).
2. Shorn of unnecessary details, some necessary facts are that the petitioner being Assistant Professor in B.S.18 was given additional charge of Principal of Government Training College for the Teachers of the Deaf, Gung Mahal,l Gulberg-II, Lahore, when he was entrusted an inquiry against one Mrs. Fauzia Khurshid, Assistant Director (Psy.) According to the petitioner the inquiry aforenoted was conducted by him in a most lawful manner and submitted his report to respondent No,2 who in turn submitted it to respondent No, 1 . Needless to add the petitioner had exonerated the accused lady from the charges levelled against her. The competent Authority i,e, respondent No,1 instead of passing any appropriate order in regard to the said inquiry, proceeded to issue a charge-sheet to the petitioner on 22-7-1997 whereby he was called upon to .Explain his conduct as to the inquiry against the accused lady. The charge-sheet contained the following two charges:-- "(i) The petitioner neither consulted nor did he collected any record or all relevant evidence, statements etc., bearing on the same.
(ii) It is alleged that the petitioner admitted before the Deputy Secretary (Tech.) that the Enquiry Report was not drafted by him."
3. The above said charge-sheet has been challenged in the present Constitutional petition mainly on the ground that it is an attempt to remove the petitioner from the post of Principal of Government Training College for the Teachers of Deaf, Gung Mahal, Lahore, and that the Inquiry Officer cannot in turn be charge-sheeted in regard to scope, conduct and finalization of the Inquiry report for he acted as a judicial officer. It is submitted that the authorised officer at the most could have ordered for a de novo inquiry or having disagreed with the findings of the Inquiry Officer proceeded to set aside the inquiry report.
4. In the report and parawise comments, the respondents have also misdirected themselves by commenting upon the holding of the additional charge of the post of Principal of Government Training College for the Teachers of the Deaf, Gung Mahal, Gulberg-1I, Lahore, as also be commenting on various aspects of the inquiry conducted by the petitioners, resultantly, they have maintained that the charge-sheet as issued to the petitioner was lawful.
5. It would be noted that the petitioner has been charge-sheeted for misconducting the inquiry by not consulting and collecting any record or the relevant evidence having bearing on the case. It is further alleged that the petitioner had admitted before the Deputy Secretary (Tech.) that the inquiry report was not drafted by him. The two charges levelled against the Petitioner are pertinently directed against his conduct as Inquiry Officer which could, at the most, entail an order for de novo inquiry or the report submitted in that regard could be set aside by the authorized officer but it is nowhere provided under the law to issue him a charge-sheet in that regard for he acted as a judicial officer and conducted the inquiry as such. It would be noted that the first charge pertains to the scope of inquiry and the conduct thereof and if the department itself had not produced any record or the relevant evidence, the Inquiry Officer is not to be blamed for the proceedings were adversarial in nature and the Inquiry Officer must maintain his impartiality and should not appear to have been biased. As far the second, charge that he had admitted before the Deputy Secretary (Tech.) that the inquiry report had not been drafted by him, suffice it to observe here that this is putting words in the mouth of the third person to frame the petitioner. The attempt seems to be utterly mala fide and not sustainable in law. As for the plea of the petitioner that he should be considered for the appointment/promotion for the post of Principal of Government Training College for the Teachers of the Deaf, Gung Mahal, Gulberg-II, Lahore, it may be noted that every eligible person has a right to be considered for appointment/promotion.
6. In the circumstances, this petition is allowed. The charge-sheet dated 22-7-1995 is declared to be without lawful authority and of no legal C effect. There shall, however, be no order as to costs.